Scaggs v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that accomplice’s out-of-court statement incriminating accused would have been admissible as statement against penal interest of accomplice if Commonwealth had proved accomplice was unavailable but that error in admission of statement was harmless
• defendants wearing dark clothes, gloves and stocking masks ordered robbery victims at gunpoint to crouch on the floor
• “[A] co-conspirator’s statements made in the defendant’s absence after the termination of the conspiracy are inadmissible in evidence at the defendant’s trial because such statements are hearsay.”
• \[I]t is settled in Virginia that . . . a declaration against penal interest is recognized as an exception to the hearsay rule. . . .\
• \[I]t is settled in Virginia that . . . a declaration against penal interest is recognized as an exception to the hearsay rule. . . .\
• \[I]t is settled in Virginia that . . . a declaration against penal interest is recognized as an exception to the hearsay rule. . . .\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).